The May 5 edition of The New York Times carried a story on its front page (above the fold, no less) titled “A Liberal Case for Gun Rights Helps Sway Federal Judiciary.” The gist of the piece was that liberal judicial scholars are now finding that Article II protects the right of the individual to keep and bear arms, not just the collective right of militias to do so.
Eight paragraphs into the piece, we were informed that it continued on page 33. Except it didn’t. The rest of the piece was nowhere to be found. My own guess is that the staff of the Times found the idea so abhorrent that they fled the building with little shrieks of horror, much as one might do upon encountering a venomous serpent.
The story ran in its entirety the next day with no explanation of the previous day’s faux pas, and it concluded by quoting an expert’s opinion that if the interpretation of Article II goes before the Supreme Court, the Court would rule in favor of the individual. No wonder they didn’t want to run it.